Report of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

by United States. Warren Commission

FINGERPRINTS AND PALMPRINTS

Two experts gave testimony concerning fingerprints and palmprints: Sebestian Latona[A10-102] and Arthur Mandella.[A10-103] Latona is the supervisor of the Latent Fingerprint Section of the Identification Division of the FBI. He has been with that Division over 32 years, having begun as a student fingerprint classifier and worked up to his present position. Mandella is a detective and fingerprint instructor with the police department of the city of New York. He has been in the fingerprint field for 19 years. Both have made a vast number of fingerprint examinations and have testified in Federal, State, and military courts.[A10-104] Their conclusions were identical, except as noted.

General Principles[A10-105]

Fingerprints and palmprints are made by the ridges which cover the surface of the fingers and palms. These ridges first appear 2 or 3 months before birth, and remain unchanged until death. Commission Exhibit No. 634-A ([p. 564]) illustrates several common characteristics or “points” formed by the ridges; a clear fingerprint impression will contain anywhere from 85 to 125 such points. While many of the common points appear in almost every print, no two prints have the same points in the same relationship to each other.

A print taken by a law-enforcement agency is known as an “inked print,” and is carefully taken so that all the characteristics of the print are reproduced on the fingerprint card; a print which is left accidentally, such as a print left at the scene of a crime, is known as a latent print. To make an identification of a latent print, the expert compares the points in the latent print with the points in an inked print. If a point appearing in a latent print does not appear in the inked print, or vice versa, the expert concludes that the two prints were not made by the same finger or palm. An identification is made only if there are no inconsistencies between the inked and latent prints, and the points of similarity and their relative positions are sufficiently distinctive, and sufficient in number, to satisfy the expert that an identity exists.[A10-106]

There is some disagreement concerning whether a minimum number of points is necessary for an identification. Some foreign law-enforcement agencies require a minimum number of 16 points. However, in the United States, in which there has been a great deal of experience with fingerprints, expert opinion holds there is no minimum number of points, and that each print must be evaluated on its own merits.[A10-107]

Palmprints are as distinctive as fingerprints, but are not as popularly known. Possibly this is because law enforcement agencies usually record only fingerprints for their identification files, since fingerprints can be much more readily classified and filed than palmprints. Also, latent fingerprint impressions are probably more common than latent palmprint impressions, because persons generally touch objects with their fingers rather than their palms. However, palmprints will frequently be found on heavy objects, since the palms as well as the fingers are employed in handling such objects.[A10-108]

Commission Exhibit No. 634-a

Ridge Characteristics

Used by Experts in Comparing Fingerprints

A latent print is the result of perspiration exuded by the sweat pores in the ridges. This perspiration is composed of water, protein or fatty materials, and sodium chloride (salt). A latent print can be developed—made visible—in several ways. Sometimes a latent print can be developed merely by the use of correct lighting. A second method is to brush the print very lightly with a powder, which adheres to its outline. Once a print is powdered it can be photographed, lifted, or both. (In lifting, an adhesive substance, such as scotch tape, is placed over a powdered print. When the adhesive is lifted the powder clings to its surface. The adhesive is then mounted.) However, powder is usually effective only on objects which have a hard, smooth, nonabsorbent surface, such as glass, tile, and various types of highly polished metals and is usually not effective on absorbent materials, such as paper or unfinished wood or metal, which absorb perspiration so that there is nothing on the material’s surface to which the powder can adhere. Prints on absorbent materials can sometimes be developed by iodine fumes, which may react with fatty or protein materials which have been absorbed into the object, or by a silver nitrate solution, which may react with sodium chloride which has been absorbed into the object.[A10-109]

Not every contact of a finger or palm leaves a latent print. For example, if the surface is not susceptible to a latent print, if the finger or palm had no perspiration, or if the perspiration was mostly water and had evaporated, no print will be found.[A10-110]

Objects in the Texas School Book Depository Building

A number of objects found in the Texas School Book Depository Building following the assassination were processed for latent fingerprints by the FBI—in some cases, after they had been processed by the Dallas police. These objects included the homemade wrapping paper bag found near the southeast corner window; the, C2766 rifle; three small cartons which were stacked near that window (which were marked “Box A,” “Box B,” and “Box C”),[A10-111] and a fourth carton resting on the floor nearby (marked “Box D”);[A10-112] the three 6.5-millimeter cartridge cases found near the window; and the cartridge found in the rifle. The results were as follows:

The paper bag.—The FBI developed a palmprint and a fingerprint on the paper bag by silver nitrate. These were compared with the fingerprints and palmprints of Lee Harvey Oswald taken by the Dallas police, and were found to have been made by the right palm and the left index finger of Lee Harvey Oswald.[A10-113]

The C2766 rifle.—The wood and metal of the rifle was absorbent, and not conducive to recording a good print.[A10-114] However, the Dallas police developed by powder some faint ridge formations on the metal magazine housing in front of the trigger and also developed by powder and lifted a latent palmprint from the underside of the barrel.[A10-115] The faint ridge formations were insufficient for purposes of effecting an identification,[A10-116] but the latent palmprint was identified as the right palm of Lee Harvey Oswald.[A10-117]

The cartons.—Using the silver nitrate method, the FBI developed nine identifiable latent fingerprints and four identifiable latent palmprints on Box A,[A10-118] seven identifiable fingerprints and two identifiable palmprints on Box B,[A10-119] and two identifiable fingerprints and one identifiable palmprint on Box C.[A10-120] One of the fingerprints on Box A was identified as the right index fingerprint of Lee Harvey Oswald,[A10-121] and one of the palmprints on Box A was identified as the left palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.[A10-122] All the remaining prints on Box A were the palmprints of R. L. Studebaker, a Dallas police officer, and Forest L. Lucy, an FBI clerk, who shipped the cartons from Dallas to the FBI Laboratory in Washington, D.C., and fingerprints of Detective Studebaker. All but one of the fingerprints on Box B belonged to Studebaker and Lucy and one palmprint was that of Studebaker. The fingerprints on Box C were those of Studebaker and Lucy and the palmprint was Studebaker’s.[A10-123] One palmprint on Box B was unidentified.[A10-124]

The FBI developed two fingerprints on Box D by silver nitrate, and the Dallas police developed a palmprint on Box D by powder.[A10-125] The fingerprints belonged to Lucy. The palmprint was identified as the right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.[A10-126] While the age of a print cannot be generally determined,[A10-127] this palmprint must have been relatively fresh, because the carton was constructed of cardboard, an absorbent material, and if a long period had elapsed between the time the print was made and the time it was powdered, the perspiration would have been absorbed into the cardboard, and the print could not have been developed by powder.[A10-128] Tests run by the FBI show that usually a latent impression on such cardboard cannot be developed by powder more than 24 hours after it is made.[A10-129] Latona felt that the maximum age of the palmprint on Box D at the time of development (which was shortly after the assassination), would have been 3 days;[A10-130] Mandella felt that the maximum time would have been a day and a half.[A10-131]

The three cartridge cases and the cartridge case found in the rifle.—No prints were developed on the cartridge found in the rifle or on the three expended cartridge cases.[A10-132]